CC BY
7
UDC: 351:35.078.3
DOI: https://doi.org/10.32689/2617-2224-2019-18-3-58-73
Bielska Tetiana Valentynivna,
Doctor of Science in Public Administration, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of Management and Public Administration, O. M. Beketov National University of Urban Economy in Kharkiv, 61002, Kharkiv, Marshal Bazhanov Str., 17, tel.: +38 (066) 450 62 12, e-mail: tanya_ belska@ukr.net
ORCID: 0000-0002-2792-4700
Бельська Тетяна Валентитвна,
доктор наук з державного управлтня, доцент, доцент кафедри менеджменту i публгчного адмтктрування, Харкгв-ський национальный утверситет мкького господарства т. О. М. Бекетова, 61002, Хартв, вул. Маршала Бажанова, 17, тел.: 066 450 62 12, e-mail: tanya_belska@ ukr.net
ORCID: 0000-0002-2792-4700
Бельская Татьяна Валентиновна,
доктор наук по государственному управлению, доцент, доцент кафедры менеджмента и публичного администрирования, Харьковский национальный университет городского хозяйства им. А. Н. Бекетова, 61002, Харьков, ул. Маршала Бажанова, 17, тел.: +38 (066) 450 6212, e-mail: tanya_belska@ukr.net
ORCID: 0000-0002-2792-4700
Lashkina Mariia Hryhoriivna,
psychologist-conflictologist, PhD in Public Administration, Assistant-consultant of People Deputy of Ukraine, Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 01005, Kyiv, Str. Hrushevskogo, 5, tel.: +38 (050) 397 2912, e-mail: тала, lashkina @gmail. com
ORCID: 0000-0002-8331-1853
Лашкгна Марiя Григорiвна,
психолог-конфлгктолог, кандидат наук державного управлтня, помгчник-консультант народного депутата Украгни, Верховна Рада Украгни, 01005, Кигв, вул. Грушевського, 5, тел.: 05039729 12, e-mail: maria.lashkina@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0002-8331-1853
Лашкина Мария Григорьевна,
психолог-конфликтолог, кандидат наук по государственному управлению, помощник-консультант народного депутата Украины, Верховная Рада Украины, 01005, Киев, ул. Грушевского, 5, тел.: +38 (050) 39729 12, e-mail: maria.lashkina@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0002-8331-1853
ARCHiTiCS OF MODERNITY: UKRAiNiAN MEASUREMENT
Abstract. The authors claim that "populism" as a phenomenon becomes the archetype of the modern world. They point out that populism is based on the emotional and irrational nature of fear and the self-preservation instinct. The authors determine that all the psychological traumas of previous generations affecting modern social life were imprinted in the collective unconscious. At the same time, new archetypes that are grown and been formed, become a factor in influencing the behavior of a generation of people.
The article justifies that the information-communicative world, which is developing rapidly, is the instrumental basis of populism. It is stated that the modernization of countries around the world, easy access to global information networks and the widespread use of smartphones give people the opportunity to use the Internet. Social networks are one of the most popular online activities.
It is indicated that the media in the modern society life play an important and at the same time dangerous role, replacing the function of informing the population to form certain attitudes, ideas and thoughts. The authors claim that modern information resources are primarily aimed at manipulating the public consciousness, which is controlled by governments of different countries, owners of television channels, and are used as a propaganda weapon. Under such conditions, the authors predict, the archetype of populism will increase its influence on the subconscious during democratic electoral races.
The article proves that the ground for the development and flourishing of the archetype of "populism" in Ukraine is very fertile, because the society is traumatized in the third and second generation and is experiencing post-traumatic psychological syndrome of famine, repressions, loss of statehood, Russian aggression in Eastern Ukraine, therefore, the use of "populism" in society will only increase and will contribute to making of irrational decisions.
At the same time, there is a public demand for change and the need for a self-actualized introverted active person.
Keywords: archetype, populism, democracy, netocracy, governance, electoral process, Ukrainian school of archetype.
АРХЕТИПИ СУЧАСНОСТ1: УКРАШСЬКИЙ ВИМ1Р
Анотащя. Автори стверджують, що "nonyni3M" як явище стае архетипом сучасного св^у. Вони вказують, що nonyni3M базуеться на емоцшнш та не-
ращональнш природi страху та iнстинктi самозбереження. Автори визнача-ють, що в колективному несвщомому закарбувалися всi психолопчш травми попереднiх поколiнь, Грунтуеться сучасне сощальне життя, вирощуються та наповнюються новi архетипи, якi стають фактором впливу на дiяння цiлого поколшня людей.
У статтi обгрунтовуеться, що шструментальною основою популiзму е шформацшно-комушкативний свiт, який стрiмко розвиваеться. Стверджу-еться, що модернiзацiя краш по всьому св^у, спрощений доступ до св^о-вих iнформацiйних мереж i широке використання смартфонiв дають людям можливють користуватися 1нтернетом. Соцiальнi мережi е одним з найпо-пуляршших онлайн-видiв дiяльностi.
Вказуеться, що засоби масово! комушкаци в життi сучасного сусшльства вiдiграють важливу та водночас небезпечну роль, замшюючи функцiю ш-формування населення на формування певних поглядiв, iдей i думок. Автори впевнеш, що сучаснi шформацшш ресурси спрямованi, насамперед, на маншулювання суспiльною свiдомiстю, яка контролюеться урядами рiз-них краш, власниками телевiзiйних каналiв i використовуеться як пропа-гандистська зброя. За таких умов, прогнозують автори, архетип популiзму шд час демократичних виборчих перегонiв нарощуватиме свiй пiдсвiдомий вплив.
У статтi доведено, що Грунт для розвитку та процвтання архетипу "по-пулiзму" в Укра!ш е дуже плiдним, оскшьки наше суспiльство мае травму i в третьому i в другому поколшш та переживае посттравматичний психоло-гiчний синдром голодомору, репресiй, втрати державносп, росшсько1 агресп на сходi Украши, тому використання "популiзму" в сусшльст буде тiльки посилюватися та сприятиме прийняттю неращональних рiшень.
Водночас юнуе запит суспiльства на змши та потребу самоактуалiзованоl штровертно1 активно! людини.
Ключовi слова: архетип, популiзм, демократiя, нетократiя, управлiння, виборчий процес, Украшська школа архетипiки.
АРХЕТИПЫ СОВРЕМЕННОСТИ: УКРАИНСКОЕ ИЗМЕРЕНИЕ
Аннотация. Авторы утверждают, что "популизм" как явление становится архетипом современного мира. Они указывают, что популизм базируется на эмоциональной и нерациональной природе страха и инстинкте самосохранения. Авторы определяют, что в коллективном бессознательном отпечатались все психологические травмы предыдущих поколений, влияющие на современную социальную жизнь. Одновременно выращиваются и наполняются новые архетипы, которые становятся фактором влияния на действия целого поколения людей.
В статье обосновывается, что инструментальной основой популизма является информационно-коммуникативный мир, который стремительно развивается. Утверждается, что модернизация стран по всему миру, упрощенный доступ к мировым информационным сетям и широкое использование
смартфонов дают людям возможность пользоваться Интернетом. Социальные сети являются одним из самых популярных онлайн-видов деятельности.
Указывается, что средства массовой коммуникации в жизни современного общества играют важную и одновременно опасную роль, заменяя функцию информирования населения на формирование определенных взглядов, идей и мыслей. Авторы уверены, что современные информационные ресурсы направлены, прежде всего, на манипулирование общественным сознанием, которое контролируется правительствами разных стран, владельцами телевизионных каналов и используются как пропагандистское оружие. При таких условиях, прогнозируют авторы, архетип популизма во время демократических избирательных гонок будет наращивать свое влияние на подсознание.
В статье доказано, что почва для развития и процветания архетипа "популизма" в Украине является очень плодородной, поскольку наше общество имеет травму и в третьем и во втором поколении и переживает посттравматический психологический синдром голодомора, репрессий, потери государственности, российской агрессии на востоке Украины, поэтому использование "популизма" в обществе будет только усиливаться, будет способствовать принятию нерациональных решений.
В то же время существует запрос общества на изменения и потребность самоактуализированного интровертного активного человека.
Ключевые слова: архетип, популизм, демократия, нетократия, управление, избирательный процесс, Украинская школа архетипики.
"There are no Jungian archetypes, every seer sees what does he suggest to his education?"
Umberto Eco
Problem statement. The statement, which became the epigraph of this article, belongs to the famous contemporary writer Umberto Eco. He used it in his book "Hot Wars and Populism in the Media" that focuses on the influence of the media on the formation of not only the agenda, but also thoughts and approaches to decision-making, to politics. Writers and art people in non-systemic transitional and turbulent chaotic times tend to more accurately sense the content of what is happening; therefore, it is necessary to rely on their thoughts and ideas in the analysis and
comprehension of contemporary politics.
Within the framework of the Ukrainian School of Archetype (further — UScA), the question of the existence of various types of archetypes, their manifestation and transformation in society and the emergence of new ones under the influence of the information space have been repeatedly raised. Archetypical methodology allows us making a deep analysis of the psycho-emotional and psycho-traumatic state of the society and its consequences. Jungian archetypes that are entrenched in stereo-
typed logic, simplify the view of modern processes and help to identify and understand those schematic matrices that underlie the collective unconscious and influence social behavior in modern life. In this sense, we can say that Jung was a visionary, since he proposed a methodology for understanding the processes of a rich informational and communicative modern world in which we live with you.
The described strategic archetypes of the Logos, Samostos, Tini, Animi and Animus, Chaos give impetus to an understanding of the formation of self-identity, national identity and identity, but do not explain the phenomenon of societal that exists in a globalized and global world. And the world continues to rapidly globalize, despite the temporary populist factor of nationalism, and it is no resistance to anyone.
Experts say that in the collective unconscious, all the psychological injuries of previous generations were captured. The social life is based on these injuries of conscious and unconscious, and new archetypes are grown and filled with these traumas, which also become a factor of influence for generations. In modern practice of the informational and communicative globalized world, new archetypal forms arise, in particular archetypes: "democracy," "common European values," "nationalism," "populism," and others. New archetypes become forms and constructions on which the mentality of the new generations is based, therefore they require a separate and careful scientific analysis. In our study, we propose to consider the popular and widespread phenomenon in the modern world — "populism," to consider its archetypal
roots on the example of the Ukrainian society.
Analysis of recent publications and identification of previously unsolved parts of the general problem. In political science, populism as a phenomenon is studied not so long ago, and in the majority it is interpreted as political technology, and not as a psychological phenomenon, therefore, most of it is analyzed by journalists and political scientists. The modern journalistic study of the American journalist John B. Ju-dis "The Great Populism" [1] reflects the historical context of the growth of populism in the United States.
In the Ukrainian contemporary political science, I. Becker [2], M. Demia-nenko [3], V. Kavka [4], I. Kiyan [5; 6], N. Khoma [7]) were engaged in problems of populism. Extremely relevant are the works of professor and a ideological inspirer of the Ukrainian school of archetype E. Afonin [8], who in his monitoring of societal changes in society recently captures an increase in categories that identify the identity of self-actualized introvert active person. O. Sushi [9] and S. Sibiryakov [10] studied archetypal manifestations of socio-psychological phenomena and the environment on the mass consciousness. O. Donchenko [11] formulated the foundations of fractal psychology and expanded the content of the matrix archetype. The works of K. Jung and all his followers are also important for us; M. Maffesoli [12], who discovered the phenomenon of modern tribalism; J. Duran [13], K. Levy-Strauss [14] and others.
In the scientific searches of the UScA, whose representatives have been actively studying the Ukrainian soci-
ety for ten years with the help of the methodology of archetypal manifestations, the current archetypes that arise, including under the influence of the existing information field, are still insufficiently researched. The hypothesis of our scientific analysis is that such a phenomenon as "populism" has become an archetype that appeared and evolved because of the traumas of society that were encapsulated in the subconscious, were not used and not lived that was based on and brought up during the years of phobias, which, in turn, rely on a strong emotion of fear and a natural human self-preservation instinct.
Purpose of the article — to conduct a descriptive analysis of those archetypes of the present that are inherent in the Ukrainian society, but which, at the same time, are typical threats and are contagious for the entire international space of the world. To realize this, we will try to conduct a descriptive intellectual analysis, using the interpretation of the ideas of K. Young to understand the archetypal nature of populism and democracy in order to understand the phenomenon of identity.
Statement of the basic material. The concept of collective unconscious that is based on certain schemes, archetypes, was the result of K. Jung's search [15] of comprehension and explanation of too rational models of society's behavior. The formation of the cultural constancy of the nation is always influenced by: historical memory, symbols and signs, archetypes, etc. A nation consists of individuals, each of which has its own mental structure, and as the social psychologist O. Pokalchuk notes, the psychic development of the individual repeats the path of development of
previous generations. "A living system, whether it wants to or not, realizes or only feels, becomes a hostage to the behavioral features acquired by previous living systems" [16, p 26], — Haeckel-Muller, the author of the biogenetic law, interprets in the nineteenth century.
It is believed that democracy as an ideological and institutional concept arose in ancient Greece; its main postulates were developed in the works of J. Locke, D. Gobes, S. Louis de Montesquieu, other thinkers and statesmen of the Renaissance. The values that were invested in understanding of the content of this political regime, as an ideological concept, are already almost seventeen centuries, if we count from the Antiquity! At the same time, researchers of tribal societies argue that democracy was inherent in prehistoric tribes, where the power belonged not only to the leaders but also to the elders, representing the representative power of the people. We can state that "democracy" is an archetype, the planform on which social practices of interaction and trust are based [17].
Dale A. Bertelsen in the paper "Media Form and Government: Democracy as an Archetypal Image in the Epoque Age" [18] convinces that participatory democracy functions as an archetypal image that dominates political thinking and political communication in contemporary culture, which allows investigating and anticipating the change of government and the form of political communication.
Most Western countries already have a big experience and historical memory of democratic procedures and processes and rather stable working democratic institutions. At the same time, today
these traditions show a strong rigidity of the ruling elites, in which it is impossible to solve problems in the modern informational, globalized and quite conflicting world. An example of this is the process of British withdrawal from the European Union as a result of the "Brexit." The Great Britain has become hostage to the archetypes of "democracy" and "British traditions," which do not allow it to quickly resolving political issues of the day.
The authors of the study of netoc-racy, A. Bard and Ya. Zoderkvist [19], in their book "Netocracy," warned about the threat to the processes of democracy under the influence of technologies of the information world. They first described this phenomenon in "A New Elite and the Life after Capitalism." According to the authors of the term "nectocracy," the development of technology has generated a new ruling class — the NETWORK class. The capitalist way of production can no longer be dominant; the fight for information flows, information channels, network virtual structures, and social networks replace the struggle for sales markets and production resources. The power of great capital retreats, the power of non-directors (owners of information, content, interpreters, and manipulators) comes. Netocratia does not require money, only a place in the NETWORK, where those, who find the entrance and know the access code.
In addition to the new ruling class, a new grassroots class will emerge, but this is not a new proletariat, it is con-suameriat (English consuming), which is easy to manage for those, who have wider access to information. They will use the smoke curtains and disinforma-
tion created by netocrats. In a netocra-tic society, there is always the possibility of creating a "parallel, virtual" reality, manipulation, loss of privacy, which is a threat to the national security of states and the depreciation of democratic values. At the same time, the netocratic society provides unlimited opportunities for personal development, the spread of knowledge and information, the globalization of ideas and thoughts, and multiculturalism [20].
In the modern world, the attitude of citizens to the surrounding social political reality is largely determined by those, who control the world of communications. It can be said that a person possessing information has an opportunity to influence the formation of public consciousness, and one, who has the ability to distribute information in his own interpretation, has almost unlimited possibilities to form the opinion of citizens on any issues (political management of the society). In December 2018, the number of Internet users in the world was 3,9 billion people, compared with 1,02 billion in 2005 (Fig. 1).
Simplified access to computers, modernization of countries around the world and the widespread use of smart-phones give people an opportunity to use the Internet. Social networking is one of the most popular online activities. On the one hand, in the life of modern society mass media play a very important, but, on the other hand, a dangerous role when it replace their initial function of informing of the population on the formation of certain views, ideas and thoughts. Today, information resources are aimed primarily at manipulating public consciousness, which is controlled by governments of different
Fig. 1. The number of internet users around the world from 2005 to 2018
(in millions) [21]
countries, owners of television channels and used as propaganda weapons. The destructive aspect of social networks is the involvement of networking communities in informational and cyberwar [22, p. 97-198].
Sooner or later new technologies will lead to the loss of the traditional system of views, the structure of power, and relationships in the society. The European identity is destroyed under the influence of modern tribalism (from the English tribe-tribe, a clan, the term that introduced M. Maffesoli into the scientific circulation [23]). Politologists say that the manifestation of nationalism, the result of which, in particular, Brecksit in the UK, the election of the U.S. President D. Trump in the United States, the coming to power of the populists in Italy, countries that were an example of democracy, is based exclusively on populism.
The emergence of non-system politicians is a world trend that became the result of two factors — netocracy that led to the break of generations and
modern "Luddism". But, if "democracy" is a consistent archetype of European identity, then how do you understand the surge of populism in the world that we are seeing lately?
Today, we can talk not only about the confrontation of generations, as the older generation is worse understood in technology, but about the total fear and rejection of a new world in which we have rapidly entered. This fear becomes common, inherent not only to the older generations, but also to young people.
New generations come to this world with the fear of lack of resources, in particular natural ones for their lives; older generations do not take innovations in technology and are fed up with fear of being pushed away from the basic life processes due to their too technological turbulence. The third reason is the global stratification between the various strata of the society. More and more people are start realizing that that wonderful future with eternal life in smart homes and smart cars, not for everyone, will be unavailable to the majority of
population. There is a confrontation to all innovations, there are many, who want to support popular ideas of a socialist, and sometimes radical-aggressive direction. John B. Judis observes that there exist both right and left and centrist populist parties. This is not an ideology, it is a political logic — a way of thinking about politics. He refers to the definition of the historian Michael Kazin, who reveals the logic of populism — "this is a language, and those, who resort to it, represent ordinary people as a huge group, not limited to the narrow limits of the class; consider their opponents among the elite selfish and undemocratic; tend to overwhelm the first and others" [24, p. 16].
Populism is a kind of blackmail, when populists are convinced that the establishment will agree to satisfy their claims, but there is no doubt that the emergence of populist movements or politicians serves as a signal of warning about a political crisis. The political class and the elites must respond quickly to such manifestations, there are many ways to resolve social conflicts before aggressive crisis phenomena occurs.
Populism is based on fear, and technological opportunities help to foment this strongest emotion to the crazy scale. Sociologist Eva Nalajewka, exploring the interconnection of the phenomena of political populism and social fear in Poland, argues reasonably that the instigation of collective fears is one of the main tools of the influence of political populists. Populists have two main tools for mobilizing supporters — fear and promise. Individuals differ in the level of perception of fear, which affects how their reaction in individual
life situations. Societies also share the collective potential of fear.
Those communities that in the past have had the opportunity to control their fate independently for a long time and to deal with external threats are less prone to fear. At the same time, those communities that did not have long-term control over their fate and were in danger have a subconscious fear and a more supportive escalation of this emotion and its responses-aggression, conflict behavior in society, and populism [25].
Fear — an a priori irrational emotion, laid naturally that needs protection, support, and acceptance. Hence, the odious needs of individuals to unite into society and have leaders in power, who offer quick and easy decisions.
Archetypes have a great influence on human emotions, have their own initiative and contain a certain way of responding. In a situation favorable to his manifestation, the archetype is capable of giving birth to thoughts and impulses, thereby interfering in it, distorting true intentions of a man. If we proceed from another property of an archetype, as an independent area of the psyche, it can be argued that they have a specific own energy that is capable of giving birth to new emotions.
Modern populism is a consequence of the unfulfilled fears of several generations of people that arose as a result of adapting to changes that quickly took place under the influence of technology and development of science.
The unsystematic processes also generate populism. It is easier to talk about things from the past, understandable to most, than to understand the singularity and convergence of the present. The
manifestations of populism are a consequence of an archetypal behavior model for mankind that has no other model. K. Jung predicted that under the influence of new technologies humanity will have new fears that in turn will lead to the emergence of new archetypes.
Ukraine has now entered to a period of great global electoral cycle, which will last until the end of 2020. In March 2019, there were general elections of the President of Ukraine, elections in the parliamentary elections in October, and in October 2020 elections to local authorities, unless the Verkhovna Rada decides otherwise. In the course of the election campaigns, the activity of populists of various degrees became so threatening that it could ultimately lead to the loss of statehood, as ailing post-traumatic society is constantly in a state of nervous excitement with a higher degree of emotion and aggression. It is heated in the media, social networks, messengers and other technologies. Sociologists state that the situation in Ukraine is much better than it looks in the media [26]. To attract attention, media distorts the real picture, and people under their influence realize the pragmatism of the situation.
Election races in Ukraine have always been accompanied by the use of populist techniques and promises. Starting with the election of the first President of Ukraine in 1991, all candidates for the post of the head of state were at the preference of the population, not offering ideas and strategies. In fear of the reproduction of the USSR, the slogan "Ukraine: a European Power for Opportunities, the Moscow colony on the situation" sounded. Nothing could be realized, because the state of the soci-
ety was characterized by subconscious fear of change, so something had to be changed to not change anything. In 1994 year — the slogan changed, according to the preferences of a certain part of the population: "Ukraine - Russia: less walls and more bridges." In 1999 year, the pendulum of preference and fear fluttered on the side of L. Kuchma only in contrast to the leader of the Communists P. Simonenko, after the sudden death of the obvious leader of that race V. Chornovil. The 2004 elections ended with the Orange Revolution and the victory of V. Yushchenko, who received this post, according to specialists' conclusions, only thanks to the populist strategy of Yulia Tymoshenko, who became his associate. The main slogans are "for Gangsters — prisons," "The law is one for all," as well as an odious phrase of the politician: "these hands did not steal anything." There is a map of division of the country into three varieties, causing indignation and annoyance in some of the population. 2010 year -the confrontation of Y. Tymoshenko and V. Yanukovych ends with the victory of the latter, accusations of falsifications, courts, but the recognition of the winner of Viktor Yanukovych with the general slogan "Improvement is already today." 2014 — the victory of P. Poroshenko in the first round on the background of annexation and the fear of losing statehood and a part of the territory with the slogan: "Live in a new way." Not on races, citizens did not demand clear programs from leaders, or a vision of the future. Only blind faith and fear, that there was no worse. The behavior of the society is similar to the reaction of a small child who is looking for a large adult "father" or "mother,"
who solves all his/her problems without changing his existence.
The Races — 2019 are traditionally characterized by a large level of populist slogans starting from "lowering gas twice" to "lowering taxes by up to 5 percent," the unsurpassed level of aggression being heated by candidates, and superimposed on the archetypal nature of fears. At the same time, observers state some of the manifestations of social behavior that are similar to the reactions and behavior of man and puberty age, in particular, the appearance of a nonsystem candidate V. Zelensky and his high pre-election rating. There were no promises in his political campaign, but only mystery, game and crony communication with his potential electorate.
In the collective unconscious traumas are reflected in the third generation, therefore one can imagine the traumas of the historical times of the Ukrainian society — "famine," "repressions," "loss of statehood" that are only now beginning to be reflected in our present generation. That is why the society has such a high level of fear and distrust of one another and state institutions, why populism wins, why the values of democracy are so hard to come to terms with.
The level of trust to own state and government institutions also depends on the psychological state of the society. Unfortunately, for Ukraine, the figures are disappointing, according to Gallup's analytical and consulting company for 2018, the level of confidence in the government is only 9 %, the lowest in the world [27]. In such conditions, there is a great demand in the society for new politicians and changes. The indicators recorded by E. Afonin in monitoring of
the societal changes in the society in recent times show that the amount of identity of self-actualized introverted active person is increasing, which gives some optimism about the "maturing" of the Ukrainian society [28].
Conclusions and prospects for further research. The first attempts to consider contemporary archetypes lead to the conclusion that "populism," as a phenomenon, becomes an archetype of the modern world. Populism is based on the emotional and irrational nature of fear and instinct of self-preservation. In the collective unconscious, all the psychological traumas of previous generations were captured. In the collective unconscious, all the psychological traumas of previous generations were captured. It is on these injuries of conscious and unconscious that social life is grounded, new archetypes are grown and filled on these traumas and archetypes also become factors of the subconscious influence on the actions of a whole generation of people. The instrumental basis of populism is the rapidly evolving information and communicative world. Modernizing countries around the world, facilitating access to world-wide information networks and a widespread use of smartphones give people access to the Internet. Social networking is one of the most popular online activities. Mass media in the life of the modern society plays an important and at the same time a dangerous role, replacing the function of informing the population on the formation of certain views, ideas and thoughts. Obviously, modern information resources are aimed, first of all, at manipulating public consciousness, which is controlled by governments of different countries,
owners of television channels and used as propaganda weapons.
In Ukraine, the ground for the development and prosperity of the archetype of "populism" is very fruitful, as our society is traumatized in the third and second generation and is experiencing the post-traumatic psychological syndrome of famine, repression, loss of statehood, Russian aggression in the Eastern Ukraine. Under such conditions, the archetype of populism during democratic electoral races will increase its subconscious influence. At the same time, in monitoring societal changes sociologists record the demand of the society for change and the need of self-actualized introvert active person.
It should be noted that contemporary archetypes, in particular, "democracy" and "populism" are not sufficiently explored and allow researching them for more than one generation of scientists.
references -
1. John B. Judis (2017). The Populist Explosion. Khakiv: Klub simeynoho doz-villya [in Ukraine].
2. Becker I. (2015). Vybory pid znakom populizmu [Elections under the sign of populism]. Veche, 17, 22-23, available at : http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/ viche_2015_17_13 [in Ukraine].
3. Demyanenko M. M. (2013). Populizm v demokratychnomu suspil'stvi: osob-lyvosti vykorystannya ta spryynyat-tya [Populism in a Democratic Society: Features of Use and Perception]. Visnyk Kyyivs'koho natsional'noho universytetu imeni Tarasa Shevchen-ka — Bulletin of the Taras Shevchenko National Taras Shevchenko University. Philosophy. Politology. Issue 3,
93-96, available at : http://nbuv.gov. ua/UJRN/VKNU_FP_2013_3_24 [in Ukraine].
4. Kavka V. V. (2015). Populizm yak efektyvna politychna tekhnolohiya suchasnykh vyborchykh protsesiv v Ukrayini [Populism as an Effective Political Technology of Contemporary Election Processes in Ukraine]. Hileya: naukovyy visnyk — Gilea: Scientific Bulletin. Issue 102, 406-409, available at : http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/ gileya_2015_102_108 [in Ukraine].
5. Kyyanka I. B. (2015). Populizm yak znaryaddya kharyzmatychnykh lideriv [Populism as an instrument of charismatic leaders]. Visnyk Dnipro-petrovs'koho universytetu. Seriya : Filosofiya. Sotsiolohiya. Politolo-hiya — Bulletin of the University of Dnipropetrovsk. Series: Philosophy. Sociology. Politology, 5, 95-100, available at : http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/ vdufsp_2015_5_14 [in Ukraine].
6. Kyyanka I. B. (2016). Populizm v konteksti derzhavnoho upravlinnya: pryklad Bilorusi [Populism in the Context of Public Administration: An Example of Belarus]. Demokratychne vryaduvannya — Democratic Governance. Issue. 16-17, available at : http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/ DeVr_2016_16-17_6 [in Ukraine].
7. Homa N. M. (2015). Tele- ta internet-populizm (na prykladi italiys'kykh politychnykh partiy) [Tele- and Internet Populism (on the Example of Italian Political Parties)]. Visnyk Mariupol's'koho derzhavnoho uni-versytetu. Seriya : Istoriya. Politolo-hiya — Bulletin of the Mariupol State University. Series: History. Politology. Issue 13-14, 321-328, available at : http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Vmdu_ ip_2015_13-14_42 [in Ukraine].
8. Afonin E. A., Sushii O. V. (2015). Za-konomirnosti ta osoblyvosti ukrayin-s'koyi suspil'noyi transformatsiyi
[Patterns and Peculiarities of the Ukrainian Social Transformation]. Stratehichna panorama — Strategic Panorama,1, 94-108, available at : http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/ Stpa_2015_1_14 [in Ukraine].
9. Sushii O. V. (2015). Dynamika poli-tychnykh i psykholohichnykh protse-siv u suchasniy Ukrayini [Dynamics of Political and Psychological Processes in Contemporary Ukraine]. Naukovi studiyi iz sotsial'noyi ta politychnoyi psykholohiyi. — Scientific Students on Social and Political Psychology, Issue 35, 61-76, available at : http://nbuv. gov.ua/UJRN/Nsspp_2015_35_8 [in Ukraine].
10. Sibiryakov S. (2013). Sotsial'ni media yak seredovyshche arkhetypnoho vplyvu na masovu svidomist' [Social media as a medium of archetypal influence on the mass consciousness]. Publichne upravlinnya: teoriya ta praktyka: zbirnyk naukovykh prats' Asotsiatsiyi doktoriv nauk z der-zhavnoho upravlinnya. — Public Administration: Theory and Practice: a collection of scientific works of the Association of Doctors of Science in Public Administration. — Kharkiv: Vyd-vo "DokNaukDerzhUpr", 13:1, 202-210 [in Ukraine].
11. Donchenko O. (2014) Ratsionalizat-siya arkhetypu konsolidatsiyi i zlahody u politychniy praktytsi [Rationalization of the Archetype of Consolidation and Accord in Political Practice]. Pub-lichne upravlinnya: teoriya ta prak-tyka — Public Administration: Theory and Practice , Issue 2 (special edition), 77-85, available at : http://nbuv.gov. ua/UJRN/Pubupr_2014_2(spets [in Ukraine].
12. Maffesoli M. (2018). Chas plemen. Zanepad indyvidualizmu u postmo-dernomu suspil'stvi [Time of tribes. The decline of individualism in postmodern society]. Kyyiv : Vyd. dim
"Kyyevo-Mohylyans'ka akademiya" [in Ukraine].
13. Gilbert Durand (1989). Beaux-arts et arch'types. La religion de l'art, Paris, P.U.F. [in France]
14. Levi-Stros K. (2000). Pervisne myslennya [Initial Thinking]. Kyiv: Ukrayins'kyy tsentr dukhovnoyi kul'tury [in Ukraine].
15. Jung's personality structure, available at : https://sites.google.com/site/to-habiblio/the-team/analiticeskaa-teo-ria-unga/struktura-licnosti-po-ungu
16. Pokalchuk O. (2011). Tremtyachi elity [Trembling Elites]. Kyiv: Forzats [in Ukraine].
17. Dahl Robert A. Democracy. Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/ democracy
18. Dale A. Bertelsen (1992). Media form and government: Democracy as an archetypal image in the electronic age. Communication Quarterly. 40:4, 325-337, DOI: 10.1080/01463379209369849
19. Bard A. and Zodverkvist Y. (2004) Netokratyya. Novaya pravyashchaya elyta y zhyzn' posle kapytalyzma [Ne-tocracy. New ruling elite and life after capitalism] St. Petersburg : Stockholm School of Economics in St. Petersburg [in Russian].
20. Lashkina M. (2014). Netocrathiya. Political Science: An Encyclopedic Dictionary of Encyclopedic Dictionaries for Students of Higher Educational Institutions of the I-IV Levels of Accreditation. Lviv: Novyy Svit - 2000, p. 436 [in Ukraine].
21. Number of internet users worldwide from 2005 to 2018 (in millions). Retrieved from https://www.statista. com/statistics/273018/number-of-internet-users-worldwide/
22. Bielska T. V. (2016). Hlobal'ne hromadyans'ke suspil'stvo: sutnist', heneza ta vplyv na derzhavnu poli-
tyku Ukrayiny [Global Civil Society: The Essence, Genesis and Influence on Ukraine's State Policy]. Kyiv: VADND [in Ukraine].
23. Maffesoli M. (2018). Chas plemen. Zanepad indyvidualizmu u postmo-dernomu suspil'stvi [Time of tribes. The decline of individualism in postmodern society]. Kyyiv : Vyd. dim "Kyyevo-Mohylyans'ka akademiya" [in Ukraine].
24. John B. Judis (2017). The Populist Explosion. Khakiv: "Klub simeynoho dozvillya" [in Ukraine].
25. Nalevaiko Eva (2009). Polytycheskyy populyzm y sotsyal'nyy strakh [Political populism and social fear]. Sot-syolohyya — Sociology, 4, 36-48, available at : http://elib.bsu.by/ bitstream/123456789/7752/1/ pages%20from%20 ^HO.orHH_2009_№°4.36-49pdf.pdf [in Belarus].
26. Volodymyr Paniotto: vybory, zakon pro movu i tomos v odyn rik mozhut' duzhe rozkhytaty suspil'stvo [Volo-dymyr Paniotto: Elections, the law on language and tomos in one year can very frustrate society]. Ukrain-ska pravda. February 04, 2019, available at : https://www.pravda.com. ua/articles/2019/02/4/7205638/ [in Ukraine].
27. Bikus Zach (2019). World-Low 9 % of Ukrainians Confident in Government. news.gallup.com. Retrieved from https://news.gallup.com/ poll/247976/world-low-ukrain-ians-confident-government. aspx?g_source=link_NEWSV9&g_ medium = NEWSFEED&g_ campaign=item_&g_content=World-Low%25209%2525%2520of%2520Uk rainians%2520Confident%2520in%25 20Government
28. Afonin E. A., Sushii O. V. (2015). Zakonomirnosti ta osoblyvosti ukrayins'koyi suspil'noyi transfor-
matsiyi [Patterns and Peculiarities of the Ukrainian Social Transformation]. Stratehichna panorama — Strategic Panorama,1, 94-108, available at : http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/ Stpa_2015_1_14 [in Ukraine].
список використаних джерел -
1. Джуд1с Дж. Б. Великий вибух попу-лiзму / Джон Б. Джудк. — Х. : Клуб сшейного дозвшля, 2017. — 92 с.
2. Беккер I. Вибори пщ знаком по-пушзму / I. Беккер // Вiче. — 2015. — № 17. — С. 22-23. — Режим доступу: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/ viche_2015_17_13
3. Дем'яненко М. М. Попушзм в демократичному сусшльствк осо-бливостi використання та сприй-няття [Електронний ресурс] / М. М. Дем'яненко // Вкн. Кшвсько-го нац. ун-ту iм. Тараса Шевченка. Фiлософiя. Полiтологiя. — 2013. — Вип. 3. — С. 93-96. — Режим доступу: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/ VKNU_FP_2013_3_24
4. Кавка В. В. Попушзм як ефектив-на полггична технолопя сучасних виборчих процеав в Украiнi [Електронний ресурс] / В. В. Кавка // П-лея: науковий вюн. — 2015. — Вип. 102. — С. 406-409. — Режим доступу: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/ ^1еуа_2015_102_108
5. Шянка I. Б. Попуизм як знаряддя ха-ризматичних лiдерiв [Електронний ресурс] / I. Б. Юянка // Вюн. Дш-пропетровського ун-ту. Серiя : Фь лософiя. Соцiологiя. Полiтологiя. — 2015. — № 5. — С. 95-100. — Режим доступу: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/ vdufsp_2015_5_14
6. Шянка I. Б. Попушзм в контекст державного управлшня: приклад Бiлорусi [Електронний ресурс] /
I. Б. Юянка // Демократичне вря-дування. — 2016. — Вип. 16-17. -Режим доступу: http://nbuv.gov.ua/ Ц^^е^-_2016_16-17_6
7. Хома Н. М. Теле- та штернет-по-пуизм (на прикладi ггалшських полiтичних партiй) [Електрон-ний ресурс] / Н. М. Хома // Вкн. Марiупольського держ. ун-ту. Се-рiя : Iсторiя. Полiтологiя. — 2015. — Вип. 13-14. — С. 321-328. — Режим доступу: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/ Vmdu_ip_2015_13-14_42
8. Афотн Е. А. Закономiрностi та особливосп украшсько! сусшль-но! трансформацп [Електронний ресурс] / Е. А. Афонш, О. В. Су-ший // Стратегiчна панорама. — 2015. — № 1. — С. 94-108. — Режим доступу: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/ Stpa_2015_1_14
9. Суший О. В. Динамка полггичних i психологiчних процеав у сучас-нiй Украш [Електронний ресурс] / О. В. Суший // Науковi студи iз со-щально! та полггично! психологи. — 2015. — Вип. 35. — С. 61-76. — Режим доступу: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/ Nsspp_2015_35_8
10. Сибиряков С. Сощальш медiа як середовище архетипного впливу на масову свщомють / С. Сибиряков // Публiчне управлшня: теорiя та практика: зб. наук. пр. Асоща-ци докторiв наук з держ. упр. — Х. : ДокНаукДержУпр, 2013 — Вип. № 1 (13). — С. 202-210.
11. Донченко О. Рацiоналiзацiя архетипу консолщаци i злагоди у полггичнш практицi [Електронний ресурс] / О. Донченко // Публiчне управлшня: теорiя та практика. — 2014. — Вип. 2 (спец. вип.). — С. 77-85. — Режим доступу: http://nbuv.gov.ua/ UJRN/Pubupr_2014_2(spets)
12. Маффесол1 М. Час племен. Занепад iндивiдуалiзму у постмодерному су-спiльствi / М. Маффесолг — К. : Вид.
дiм "Киево-Могилянська академiя", 2018 — 264 с.
13. Gilbert Durand. Beaux-arts et archétypes. La religion de l'art, Paris, P.U.F., 1989.
14. Лев^Строс К. Первюне мислення / К. ЛевьСтрос. — К. : Украшський центр духовно! культури, 2000. -324 с.
15. Структура личности по Юнгу [Электронный ресурс]. — Режим доступа: https://sites.google.com/site/ tohabiblio/the-team/analiticeskaa-teoria-unga/struktura-licnosti-po-ungu
16. Покальчук О. Тремтячi елгги / О. По-кальчук. — К. : Форзац, 2011. — 168 с.
17. Dahl Robert A. Democracy // Encyclopaedia Britannica. — Режим доступа: https://www.britannica.com/topic/ democracy
18. Dale A. Bertelsen. Media form and government: Democracy as an archetypal image in the electronic age / Bertelsen Dale A. // Communication Quarterly, 1992. — № 4 (40). — С. 325-337, DOI: 10.1080/01463379209369849
19. Бард А. Netократия. Новая правящая элита и жизнь после капитализма / А. Бард, Я. Зодерквист; пер. с швед. — СПб. : Стокгольмская школа экономики в Санкт-Петербурге, 2004. — 252 с.
20. Лашкта М. Нетокрапя / М. Лаш-кша // Полгголопя: навч. енцикл. слов.-довщ. для студ. вищ. навч. закл. I-IV рiвнiв акредитацИ ; за наук. ред. Хоми Н. М. [В. М. Денисенко, О. М. Сорба, Л. Я. Угрин та ш.]. — Л.: Новий Свгг - 2000, 2014. — С. 436.
21. Number of internet users worldwide from 2005 to 2018 (in millions). — Mode of access: https://www.statista. com/statistics/273018/number-of-internet-users-worldwide/
22. Бельська Т. В. Глобальне громадян-ське сусшльство: сутшсть, генеза та вплив на державну полггику Укра1-
ни : монографiя / Т. В. Бельська. -Кив : ВАДНД, 2016. — 300 с.
23. Маффесол1 М. Час племен. Занепад iндивiдуалiзму у постмодерному су-спiльствi / М. Маффесолi. — К.: Вид. дiм "Киево-Могилянська академiя", 2018. — 264 с.
24. Джуд1с Джон Б. Великий вибух по-пулiзму / Дж. Б. Джудк — Х.: Клуб сiмейного дозвшля, 2017. — 192 с.
25. Налевайко Эва. Политический популизм и социальный страх / Эва Налевайко [Электронный ресурс] // Социология. — 2009. — № 4. — С. 3648. — Режим доступа : http://elib.bsu. by/Ыtstream/123456789/7752/1/ pages%20from%20Социологи-я_2009_№4.36-49pdf.pdf
26. Володимир Панютто: вибори, закон про мову i томос в один рк можуть дуже розхитати сусшльство [Електронний ресурс] // Украшська прав-
да. — 4 лютого 2019 р. — Режим доступу : https://www.pravda.com.ua/ articles/2019/02/4/7205638/
27. Bikus Zach (2019). World-Low 9 % of Ukrainians Confident in Government [Electronic resource] Mode of access: https://news.gal-lup.com/poll/247976/world-low-ukrainians-confident-government. aspx?g_source=link_NEWSV9&g_ medium = NEWSFEED&g_ campaign=item_&g_content=World-Low%25209%2525%2520of%2520Uk rainians%2520Confident%2520in%2 520Government
28. Афотн Е. А. 3aKOHOMipHOCTi та особливост украшсько'1 сусшль-но1 трансформацп / Е. А. Афонш, О. В. Суший // CTpaTeri4Ha панорама. — 2015. — № 1. — С. 94108. — Режим доступу: http://nbuv. gov.ua/UJRN/Stpa_2015_1_14
